Indigenous Permaculture Convergence

http://woodbinecenter.org/ipc
http://woodbinecenter.org/indigenouspermaculture
http://woodbinecenter.org/

Indigenous Permaculture Convergence
Date: Fri, 08/13/2010 - 4:00pm - Sun, 08/15/2010 - 3:00pm

Join us for the first Indigenous Permaculture Convergence. Learn about
indigenous permaculture principles and practice. Network with other
indigenous people, permaculturists, and community activists. Connect
with ongoing and planned indigenous permaculture classes, projects, and
events. Attend workshops on traditional ecological knowledge, land
struggles, decolonization, and eco-cultural restoration.

Cost: $350 by May 31, 2010. $400 after June 1, 2010. Cost includes meals
and lodging. Limited scholarship and work exchange opportunities available.

Contact: info@woodbinecenter.org
Phone: 303.380.7984

I am skeptical of your great white northitude, the agriculture of those indigenous to the north was very very limited. By clicking the link I see that you are promoting a group in Colorado, which is definitely not the North.

Emerson White wrote:
I am skeptical of your great white northitude, the agriculture of those indigenous to the north was very very limited. By clicking the link I see that you are promoting a group in Colorado, which is definitely not the North.

Ya up here they were hunter/gathers not much farming.

Emerson White wrote:
I am skeptical of your great white northitude, the agriculture of those indigenous to the north was very very limited. By clicking the link I see that you are promoting a group in Colorado, which is definitely not the North.

huh? >

I didn't mean to induce a frown ... but I think this would go better in the rockies forum.

yelenick, I am interested almost exclusively in indigenous permaculture. Masanobu Fukuoka's 'One Straw Revolution' combined with Holmgren's theories renewed my interest. Would you be able to tell me if any such conference is scheduled for the Upper Midwest? Is it possible your organization will be hosting a conference in South Dakota, Iowa, or Minnesota?

I would just like to interject on the distinction between prehistoric North American farmers vs hunter/gatherers.  Just because indigenous peoples did not "garden" does not mean they did not manage the ecosystems they were adapted to.

Burning, selective cutting of trees, leaving a seed crop are just a few ways North American hunter-gatherers managed their environments to make it more favorable to them.  Just because they weren't farming does not mean prehistoric groups did not have a huge impact on their environments.

wombat wrote:
I would just like to interject on the distinction between prehistoric North American farmers vs hunter/gatherers.  Just because indigenous peoples did not "garden" does not mean they did not manage the ecosystems they were adapted to.

Burning, selective cutting of trees, leaving a seed crop are just a few ways North American hunter-gatherers managed their environments to make it more favorable to them.  Just because they weren't farming does not mean prehistoric groups did not have a huge impact on their environments.

These are ways that they improved their environments, yes, however these are also things that didn't happen in the far north.

while technically correct that the title of this is slightly misleading,Its important to recognize that native cultures managed wherever they lived.That may include only animals or a combination of landscape and animals.Permaculture is an attempt to find sustainable land use models and native cultures have much to offer.They had to return at least one calorie for every one expended vs modern 50 calories spent for every one consumed.I would go so far as to say they hold some of the only sustainable techniques that ive ever seen.These techniques are applicable to other similar ecosystems so northern techniques might be aplicable to higher elevations further south.Of course the word indigenous might be being used as a marketing ploy as well.

If we want to use native american models than we need to look at the specific data and come to terms with the variability.

The north woods (I grew up in Northern Michigan) was not apparently burned as part of aboriginal adaptation-- and is not part of a natural fire regeme (I think our woods at home has not burned in 200 or 300 years), but still there was selection of food plants and animals and these affect the on-going composition of the natural ecology.

Recently, one of my students began sending me some of the data he is working on in the Great Basin.  It concerns the notion that archeological interpretation has missed significant aspects of that cultural adaptation because they did not adequately take into consideration sexual division of labor--the different activities of men and women in traditional societies.

http://www.csus.edu/indiv/z/zeanahd/box.pdf

Zeanah is heading out this spring to study some Australian hunter-gather groups -- which still exist--to test this model so soon we should see some interesting results that do not conform to the traditional interpretation of hunter-gather societies.

It must be my elitism showing, I typically think of the great white north being Alaska (excluding south east) and the north part of Canada.

on a light note,

the great white north Meme came out of the fact that in canada  broadcasters were allowed 3 min 30 seconds less commercial time than american broadcasters, SCTV  which was syndicated here in canada and the US , needed 3 and a half minutes of canadian content , this would help entitle them to production tax credits, so a parody of canadianism was created painted in broad strokes, much beloved here in canada, so all of Canada is the Great White North, and Alaska can come play too, cause its such spectacular land, stark and beautiful.

cheers